dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
11804
share rss forum feed


US_TV_ROCKS

@start.ca
reply to El Quintron

Re: DTV illegal in Canada? What is the legal justification?

I have a dirctv subscription and updates are streamed via the satellite right to the box. No phone or internet required.
As it's already been stated, there are ways around that if it was required.

With respect to this topic: My "felony intemperance with a business model" doesn't really make me feel like a criminal. I could care less about Bell or Rogers. The CRTC and the Canadian government need to start respecting peoples rights to choose what they watch, read and listen to. They force Canadian content on us at every turn. A lot of it isn't worthy.
Open up the boarders and let the market sort it out. People will choose the better product and the better value. There is very little value in Canadian satellite and cable offerings.

Disclaimer: I also subscribe to Shaw Direct for the Canadian content that *I CHOOSE* to watch.


johnkim

join:2011-10-01
reply to FiReSTaRT

said by FiReSTaRT:

The topic was pretty well covered, but one argument wasn't addressed - "if you pay for it, it can't be illegal." What about crystal meth? You have to pay for that too, but the forces of law and order might have some issues with you having any amount on your person

I don't want to get into the debate of the drug policy but ask any normal person that you can go to jail if you subscribe to Dish/DTV (nasdaq symbol of directv), they will think it is insane.

Law should make sense and comply with what the society believes to be the acceptable behaviour.


DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2

said by johnkim:

Law should make sense and comply with what the society believes to be the acceptable behaviour.

If nothing else, this thread tells you why things are the way they are. It is considered acceptable in Canada, mostly for copyright and licensing reasons, to not allow free access to American satellite signals. You can believe differently, but what you have is the way it is, for good and legitimate reasons.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.


WhaleOilBee
What a long strange trip it's been

join:2011-08-02
Manotick, ON
Reviews:
·Acanac
reply to nitzguy

said by nitzguy:

...You're free to go back to the US . That's what will fly....

Please don't send me back, I promise to behave.

I wonder though, if I were some minority, and the government didn't allow me to watch programming from my former homeland if that would fly.

said by nitzguy:

Cable co X (usually Shaw through what they used to call Cancom) pulls in that signal OTA from somewhere near the US border, uplinks it to their satellite and then downlinks it back to their Cable BDU's, or downlinks it to Shaw's centre in either Mississauga or Calgary I think, and then uplinks that US station back up to F1 or F2R or whatever bird is up there these days....and then your dish is pointed at it and pulls the signal back down....

Very mundane process, but that's how your OTA signal goes, Shaw doesn't directly pay the US broadcaster for this...simply the equipment required to do all this uplink/downlink and conversion...

Are you sure? That sounds pretty low-tech and would only work for OTA networks ( ABC,CBS,NBC,FOX,PBS ). How would they get CNN and the other premium US channels that aren't broadcast OTA if they didn't get a digital feed from the source network?


nitzguy
Premium
join:2002-07-11
Sudbury, ON

said by WhaleOilBee:

said by nitzguy:

...You're free to go back to the US . That's what will fly....

Please don't send me back, I promise to behave.

I wonder though, if I were some minority, and the government didn't allow me to watch programming from my former homeland if that would fly.

said by nitzguy:

Cable co X (usually Shaw through what they used to call Cancom) pulls in that signal OTA from somewhere near the US border, uplinks it to their satellite and then downlinks it back to their Cable BDU's, or downlinks it to Shaw's centre in either Mississauga or Calgary I think, and then uplinks that US station back up to F1 or F2R or whatever bird is up there these days....and then your dish is pointed at it and pulls the signal back down....

Very mundane process, but that's how your OTA signal goes, Shaw doesn't directly pay the US broadcaster for this...simply the equipment required to do all this uplink/downlink and conversion...

Are you sure? That sounds pretty low-tech and would only work for OTA networks ( ABC,CBS,NBC,FOX,PBS ). How would they get CNN and the other premium US channels that aren't broadcast OTA if they didn't get a digital feed from the source network?

In regards to your first point...you'd only be able to argue if there was a channel that wasn't available that was only available in the US ...otherwise I think you might have a point...otherwise, there is probably a "Canadian equivalent"...

The process is 'low tech' ...similiar process for non-OTA channels....

CNN in Atlanta posts up to...ugh I can't remember the name of the Sattelite ...

The satellite in question is Galaxy 25. CNN at their uplink centre in Atlanta,GA, uplinks their broadcast signal to the Galaxy 25 satellite sitting at 93.1W in Geostationary orbit @ 0 degrees N. (CNN USA East feed in this instance).

Bell/Shaw Direct have dishes at their downlink/uplink headends that are pointed at 93.1W, and with appropriate equipment and dishes pull the signal down, do their magic with it, and then uplink it back to the appropriate Anik/Nimiq satellite....I'm not figuring where they are going as that's not important ...

Then your dish is pointed as those satellites, and that's how you pull it into your home....

Isn't technology wonderful? Before we had to use very old and not 100% reliable microwave technology.....not that satellites are 100% fool-proof themselves, mechanical failures and potential solar radiation can damage them and its not like you can send a service guy out to fix them....

CBC's nationwide network was via microwave signal back in the 50s I believe....maybe before that....different way of doing a similiar thing, except every 20km or so they'd have a microwave dish (which looks like a drum if you look at it from the side) and it would repeat and reconstitute the signal and send it to the next microwave tower and so on and so forth....they had to be on complete LOS though otherwise you lost the signal...which is why it made it difficult to bring across the country, especially in places with rugged terrain and with inaccessible hydro...

HTH

Ryan

HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5
reply to WhaleOilBee

said by WhaleOilBee:

Are you sure? That sounds pretty low-tech and would only work for OTA networks ( ABC,CBS,NBC,FOX,PBS ). How would they get CNN and the other premium US channels that aren't broadcast OTA if they didn't get a digital feed from the source network?

One of the major uplink sites is in McGregor, ON (just outside of Windsor). That's why you get Detroit stations like WDIV, WXYZ, WBJK, WWJ and WTVS in various parts of Canada. They just grab it OTA with an antenna and uplink it.
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net


battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000
reply to johnkim

"If one pays for it, how can you say it is illegal?"

Uh.. Do we really have to answer that question? If I pay for a bag of weed does that make it legal?
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company.



El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL

said by battleop:

"If one pays for it, how can you say it is illegal?"

Uh.. Do we really have to answer that question? If I pay for a bag of weed does that make it legal?

Already mentionned upthread:

»Re: DTV illegal in Canada? What is the legal justification?

But thanks for coming out.
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have


battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000

Please show me where this is mentioned ABOVE my reply. Not at the very bottom of the page...

Then again if it makes you feel superior that you have pointed out something that I have missed above my post then by all means continue to gloat.
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company.


MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to battleop

said by battleop:

"If one pays for it, how can you say it is illegal?"

Uh.. Do we really have to answer that question? If I pay for a bag of weed does that make it legal?

I always pay for my politicians in cash ...... golfing is for amateurs.


El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to battleop

said by battleop:

Please show me where this is mentioned ABOVE my reply. Not at the very bottom of the page...

If you had bothered reading the thread before spouting off you would've noticed this was covered on the last page.

Not that I would prevent from trying to re-visit that angle if you chose to do so.
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have


battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000

Last page? As far as I can tell this thread this topic is a single page.



El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL

said by battleop:

Last page? As far as I can tell this thread this topic is a single page.

It's three pages long, this is the third.
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have


battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000

If you follow the link from the front page there is nothing that indicates there is more than one page to this thread.
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company.



El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL

said by battleop:

If you follow the link from the front page there is nothing that indicates there is more than one page to this thread.

I don't know about you, but I see "page: 1 2 3" at the top and botton of the topic. I was wondering why you hadn't read the entire topic, honestly.
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have


battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000

Click for full size
It appears as a single page.

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1

said by battleop:

It appears as a single page.

....something is going screwy for you. I'm seeing it as 3 pages as well.

HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5

said by bt:

said by battleop:

It appears as a single page.

....something is going screwy for you. I'm seeing it as 3 pages as well.

He must have something different set in his preferences in his profile. I'm seeing it as 3 pages too. Either way, the distinction between "above" and "a few pages back" is bordering on pedantic when referring to a previous part of the current thread of conversation in a topic.
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net


sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable

Click for full size
See Topics/Posts per page ... for me this thread is 2 pages long!


J E F F
Whatta Ya Think About Dat?
Premium
join:2004-04-01
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Rogers Portable ..

LOL! I'm at one page too!

Simple answer to question. Illegal, yes, will you ever be charged? No. It's like breaking the speed limit. You do 3 over the limit, illegal, yes, will you ever be pulled over and charged, no. Not if your paperwork is in order anyway.

The cheaper prices and better content make US providers look attractive.
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. - Albert Einstein



Ian
Premium
join:2002-06-18
ON
kudos:3
reply to DKS

said by DKS:

It is considered acceptable in Canada, mostly for copyright and licensing reasons, to not allow free access to American satellite signals. You can believe differently, but what you have is the way it is, for good and legitimate reasons.

Acceptable to who? And legitimate to who?

I don't consider (morally or ethically) that it is a crime to "infringe on someones business model".

I see picking up a US satellite TV signal to be no different to when I was a kid and watching the Buffalo stations via a tall antennae. As far as I'm concerned, get a US post office box, US credit card, pay for it, and watch it with a crystal clear conscience. Might you get fined? Sure. You might also win the lottery.
--
“Any claim that the root of a problem is simple should be treated the same as a claim that the root of a problem is Bigfoot. Simplicity and Bigfoot are found in the real world with about the same frequency.” – David Wong


DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2

said by Ian:

said by DKS:

It is considered acceptable in Canada, mostly for copyright and licensing reasons, to not allow free access to American satellite signals. You can believe differently, but what you have is the way it is, for good and legitimate reasons.

Acceptable to who? And legitimate to who?

I don't consider (morally or ethically) that it is a crime to "infringe on someones business model".

I see picking up a US satellite TV signal to be no different to when I was a kid and watching the Buffalo stations via a tall antennae. As far as I'm concerned, get a US post office box, US credit card, pay for it, and watch it with a crystal clear conscience. Might you get fined? Sure. You might also win the lottery.

When you are bypassing the rights of the broadcasters, who paid very good money for the right to distribute a program in Canada, it's theft. That's a crime. Rationalize it any way you want, but in law, it's still theft. Don't like it? Change the law. But so far, the rights of the distributor are pretty clear. And the right to block is also grounded in law, unless you pay the distributor. That's their business model and how they make money.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.


Spike
Premium
join:2008-05-16
Toronto, ON

3 edits
reply to johnkim

Is it not still bypassing the so-called "rights" of the Canadian incumbents by watching broadcast TV on an OTA HD from Buffalo instead of CTV? Boohoo, poor Bell.

How is it that one distribution mechanism is okay while the other is not?
Its not because its Satellite either, as FTA dishes are considered legal yet you can still infringe on the (again) so-called "rights" of Bell, Global or Shaw, etc by receiving various American broadcast feeds.

Law be damned, it makes no sense. You could say the same thing about mainstream P2P filesharing being illegal yet millions of people do it without any thought or care about ones obsolete business model.
If the law is unjust, nobody will care about it, simple as that. P2P is a grand example.



DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2

said by Spike:

Is it not still bypassing the so-called "rights" of the Canadian incumbents by watching broadcast TV on an OTA HD from Buffalo instead of CTV? Boohoo, poor Bell.

How is it that one distribution mechanism is okay while the other is not?

Because that particular spillover is limited in distribution.

Law be damned, it makes no sense. You could say the same thing about mainstream P2P filesharing being illegal yet millions of people do it without any thought or care about ones obsolete business model.
If the law is unjust, nobody will care about it, simple as that. P2P is a grand example.

Yes, it is illegal. The silliest argument is "Everybody does it".
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.


Spike
Premium
join:2008-05-16
Toronto, ON

said by DKS:

Yes, it is illegal. The silliest argument is "Everybody does it".

Too bad its fact. (Much to your dismay, because everyone should be obeying laws that are there to protect business models and nothing more)

Also, "Limited in distribution" includes the whole GTA, I wouldn't call that "limited" by any means.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4

1 recommendation

said by Spike:

"Limited in distribution" includes the whole GTA, I wouldn't call that "limited" by any means.

The GTA is just a tiny part of Canada.
Area of GTA ~ 7,124 sq. km »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Toronto_Area
Area of Canada ~ 9,985,000 sq. km »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada
GTA comprises about 0.07% of Canada by area

GTA population is about 6MM »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Toronto_Area
Canada population close to 35MM »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada
GTA comprises about 17% of Canada's population

Either way, it's pretty limited.
A 17% shareholding might get you 1 or 2 seats on a Board of Directors consisting of 10-12 members. Hardly significant.


Spike
Premium
join:2008-05-16
Toronto, ON

2 edits
reply to johnkim

Quite large in comparison to the amount that are actually willing to go through the trouble to get American TV in the first place.

From what I remember this law was mostly used to crack down on illegal piracy (when cracking N2 was childs play) of US signals as the incumbents were in an uproar about it.



DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2
reply to Spike

said by Spike:

said by DKS:

Yes, it is illegal. The silliest argument is "Everybody does it".

Too bad its fact. (Much to your dismay, because everyone should be obeying laws that are there to protect business models and nothing more)

Don't know much about ethics, do you?

Also, "Limited in distribution" includes the whole GTA, I wouldn't call that "limited" by any means.

Compared to the rest of Canada, it is.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.


Ian
Premium
join:2002-06-18
ON
kudos:3
reply to MaynardKrebs

said by MaynardKrebs:

GTA comprises about 17% of Canada's population

And the other 83% also lives pretty close to the US border, for the most part.


Spike
Premium
join:2008-05-16
Toronto, ON
reply to DKS

said by DKS:

Don't know much about ethics, do you?

Ethics also works both ways, and as long as its all one-sided against the public, its fair-game.

The TPP for example also wants to remove cancon requirements.